Talk:Leo J. Ryan Federal Building

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Leo J. Ryan Federal Building was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
	An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on March 3, 2007.
Article milestones Date Process Result May 27, 2007 Good article nominee Listed June 3, 2007 Peer review Reviewed June 22, 2007 WikiProject peer review Reviewed June 22, 2007 Good article reassessment Delisted Current Status: Delisted good article

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. This article is within the scope of the San Francisco Bay Area WikiProject, a collaborative effort to build a more detailed guide on Wikipedia's coverage of San Francisco and the Bay Area. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Architecture Portal This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the assessment scale.

[edit] Review note

Review — This article is currently being reviewed (additional comments are welcome).Trishm 11:54, 27 May 2007 (UTC) I have passed this article as it appears to meet the Good Article criteria. Nice job. Further improvements would be polishing the prose to 'sparkling' - adding details and using phrases that allow you to visualise or otherwise become connected to the building. A peer review may be the next step.

Well done! Trishm 12:15, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you so much! I will work on the prose, and then after that is done post for a Peer Review. Smee 12:32, 29 May 2007 (UTC).
  • Good job Smee! Anonymous Dissident ^Utter 02:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Thank you so much! Smee 02:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Delilsted

Sorry guys - I've reviewed this at WP:ARCHPR I'm delisting on the grounds it's not broad enough in it's coverage of the building itself (3a). --Mcginnly | Natter 09:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

• That is most unfortunate. (2) other editors took a look at this article and both thought it was GA material. Both the GA reviewer and the other editor that commented at the Peer Review. Please reconsider. Smee 19:43, 22 June 2007 (UTC).

• I agree with Mcginnly, it is a decent article, but it simply doesn't have sufficient coverage of the building. Perhaps some more information as was suggested in the Peer Review would be beneficial. Lsi john 21:04, 22 June 2007 (UTC)